TV may frown on ethnic profiling at airports, but ask real-life flyers.Getty Images

Two ACLU lawyers walk into an airport bar . . .

Somewhere along the way, the application of common sense has become something that Americans should avoid, be ashamed of and certainly not admit to in public. For example, since shortly after the 9/11 mass murder attacks, the sticky issue of racial, religious and ethnic profiling has re-emerged, and in a big way.

On TV, unsurprisingly, we’ve seen news shows — “60 Minutes” — and documentaries — a recent one on A&E — devoted to the tacit condemnation of profiling those of Middle Eastern/Arab/Muslim origin or choice, especially when such folks enter airports.

But it’s not a sticky issue. And the overwhelming majority — like 99.9 percent — of all people, everywhere, including ACLU lawyers, are 100 percent in favor of profiling where it most counts: in airports. And I think I can prove it:

We’re travelling from JFK to London, got it? There are only two daily flights.

Flight A openly and fully acknowledges that those with Middle Eastern/Arab/Muslim appearance and names, plus their luggage, will be more carefully screened by security. “Yes, We DO Profile,” reads the sign at the ticket counter. It also appears on the ticket.

Flight B openly and fully acknowledges that it’s “Profile-Free.” In fact, this flight politely and sensitively exempts those with Middle Eastern/Arab/Muslim connections from any security checks at all, their luggage included. Furthermore, as an added incentive, this flight is $100 per ticket less than the flight that does profile such passengers.

Now which flight will ACLU lawyers choose? How about anti-Western United Nations diplomats? How about the Muslim mother escorting her children? How about any person, no matter how enlightened and sensitive to any form of discrimination, wishing to fly to London for any legitimate purpose?

You think they’d choose Flight B?

Flight A would be full; Flight B, if a pilot could be found, would fly virtually empty. No? Despite what we’ve seen and heard on TV since just after 9/11, who, regardless of whether they admit it, isn’t in favor of airport profiling?

Profiling, in this regard, is not a political, racial, ethnic, religious or enlightenment issue; it’s a common-sense issue. And to frame it as anything else or worse is an insult to all people — all people of all races, ethnicities and religions — with common sense.

While we’re at it, good people who apply common sense are damned tired of being condemned as hateful bigots.

* * *

On Dec. 7,, the 70th anniversary of the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor, PIX-Ch. 11 newswoman Tamsen Fadal reported that the attack “eventually led to World War II.”

That’s odd; here we always thought Nazi Germany’s invasion of Poland, in 1939, was the start of WWII. Oh, well, live and learn.

* * *

Oh, so we weren’t crazy. The FCC this month mandated a volume cap on commercials, having found that a vast majority of viewers recognize that TV networks and stations jack up the audio to serve advertisers.

At the urging of readers, I once checked with Fox on this. It seemed the volume soared during commercials, so much that viewers had to scramble for the remote, lower the volume, then raise it again when programming returned. What a pain.

Nope, I was told, we must be hearing things.

* * *

A new Jaguar commercial features a narrator cooing that the latest models are “extremely agile, remarkably powerful and fiercely independent.”

Great, just what we want from a car — agility, power and a mind of its own.